chitoryu12 posted:

New Vegas gives you an easy path with all the main quest markers along it so you can just follow the story and see a bunch of neat stuff, but they also load the center of the map with shortcuts and extra content and don't put up invisible walls for the north passage at the beginning of the game so you can always skip any of the light railroading whenever you want as long as you have the skills to do it.

Cojawfee posted:

The only thing stopping you from going literally anywhere in the map is your inability to fight monsters way above your skill level.

Wolfsheim posted:

Wasn't that gender specific, though? Like if you're a girl you gently caress the guy's son and as a guy you gently caress his daughter. At least that's the way I remember it

Acebuckeye13 posted:

chitoryu12 posted:

New Vegas gives you an easy path with all the main quest markers along it so you can just follow the story and see a bunch of neat stuff, but they also load the center of the map with shortcuts and extra content and don't put up invisible walls for the north passage at the beginning of the game so you can always skip any of the light railroading whenever you want as long as you have the skills to do it.

JackBadass posted:

Which you don't until it's useless to do so. Face it, NV doesn't have nearly the open world experience 3 did. That's not even debatable. NV definitely had a world that felt more alive, which I can see the appeal of, although personally I felt that 3 nailed the world much better in the sense that it felt like a post-apocalyptic wasteland where people were just struggling to survive, and the plot revolved around that atmosphere, what with the whole water purifier stuff. New Vegas had about as much post-apocalyptic feel as a lawn that hasn't been mowed in two weeks. Way too much of the map was settled, and you never got the feeling anyone was facing any kind of struggle.

I know I'm being all over the place, but my main point is that 3 was an overall better game. That's not to say New Vegas didn't do better in some areas, like the weapon mods and some of the DLC, but it's cons list is much longer.

chitoryu12 posted:

Not too sure you played the same game as me, champ.

Acebuckeye13 posted:

There's actually a bunch of stuff in the middle of the map if you're willing to look, plus passages to get through to the other side. Anyone who complains New Vegas was too linear simply doesn't have enough imagination.

Yasser Arafatwa posted:

no one seemed to be struggling in 3 though that i can remember

the problem was every location felt like an island unto itself

Yasser Arafatwa posted:

no one seemed to be struggling in 3 though that i can remember

the problem was every location felt like an island unto itself

JackBadass posted:

Which you don't until it's useless to do so. Face it, NV doesn't have nearly the open world experience 3 did. That's not even debatable. NV definitely had a world that felt more alive, which I can see the appeal of, although personally I felt that 3 nailed the world much better in the sense that it felt like a post-apocalyptic wasteland where people were just struggling to survive, and the plot revolved around that atmosphere, what with the whole water purifier stuff. New Vegas had about as much post-apocalyptic feel as a lawn that hasn't been mowed in two weeks. Way too much of the map was settled, and you never got the feeling anyone was facing any kind of struggle.

I know I'm being all over the place, but my main point is that 3 was an overall better game. That's not to say New Vegas didn't do better in some areas, like the weapon mods and some of the DLC, but it's cons list is much longer.

JackBadass posted:

This is the one I played. You know, the one full of post-apocalyptic stuff like this:

JackBadass posted:

You know, the one full of post-apocalyptic stuff like this:

Zoq-Fot-Pik posted:

You have not even the slightest clue what you're talking about, much like Bethesda's writing team.

steinrokkan posted:

Nice trolling, rear end in a top hat.

JackBadass posted:

I think I'm the only one here who actually does know what they're talking about...

Fooz posted:

NV had no story

Zoq-Fot-Pik posted:

JackBadass posted:

This is the one I played. You know, the one full of post-apocalyptic stuff like this:

JackBadass posted:

Problem? That's what it should have felt like.

Cojawfee posted:

Yeah, that's pretty post apocalyptic. You turn in your bottle caps for chips and play card games in the shambles of what used to be a casino. Or do you think post apocalyptic means that no civilization exists ever again for the entirety of the future of Earth?

sout posted:

Another plus of New Vegas' intro is that it only takes like 3 minutes until the whole game becomes available to you.

Merry Magpie posted:

Also, why does a Chinese general commit seppku?

Merry Magpie posted:

To be fair, Jingwei never speaks a word of English in-game making this dialog even stupider.

Succeeding the speech check means Jingwei stabs himself in the gut and somehow immediately dies. Also, why does a Chinese general commit seppuku?

Yasser Arafatwa posted:

that doesn't make any narrative sense though? like yeah if everyone was still inside their vaults i could buy it, but they're out in the wastes exploring and setting up new towns and lives in what remains

trade is one of those really basic and fundamental things humans do once they've started making settlements, it's bad writing to have all these little oases within shouting distance in some cases having no contact or communication

even if you wanted to make the argument that it was fresh after the apocalypse and they're just subsisting and foraging, it doesn't really fit with how settled in and built up all the different locations actually are


like with new vegas, the people in different towns and places are aware of their neighbors and their situations, it made logical sense

people would visit places like the strip on occasion, or trade goods and stuff, obviously not so much with the deathclaw infestation north of sloan, the powdergangers around primm, the legion out by novac, etc. but you get the idea, it was designed to function how people actually do in real life as opposed to the mess we got in 3

2house2fly posted:

That's all fine really because the whole DLC is a video game designed by an insane racist.

Zoq-Fot-Pik posted:

two crazy people who think they're superheroes.

2house2fly posted:

NV was filled to the brim with story, that's one of the common criticisms I see of it- almost every quest tied back in or was related in some way to the main conflict, with the result that you couldn't blow off the main story and explore like on F3 because exploring would just lead you to more main story.

Zoq-Fot-Pik posted:

There is no contact between settlements other than that I think.

Fooz posted:

It definitely had a realized world and situation, which is a big strength of the fallout series, but "find benny" and "choose a guy and help him win" is just so scant that I feel crazy here. Theres no beats or motivation or anything. It almost feels like half of what would constitute a meaningful plot, as if FO2 ended before the enclave were introduced. I understand that NV is some kind of gospel here but when it comes to the narrative I just don't get it.

It might have something to do with the fact that FO1 and 2 each had so much to introduce about the world of fallout that even the dullest parts had something to show you. 3 and NV have to take the world for granted, which makes things less exciting.

King Vidiot posted:

There's also the Not-Vampires and the people who live on top of a bridge, the "town" of Arefu which is like 3-and-a-half families who live in lean-to shacks and don't seem to go anywhere or ever leave or let anybody in.

Zoq-Fot-Pik posted:

One of the women there is mentally ill and believes she's a normal housewife in Pre-War America, a culture she would have zero knowledge of or experience with as a benighted wasteland peasant with no food or water.